[{"_1":2,"_100":-5,"_101":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6178038,"mediaKeyId","5329265-87b9768d59923de098217aef19bb59cd","parentId",5329265,"title","Council declines to review Aptus Financial student-loan assistance contract after hours of debate","audioSeconds",2110,"startMs",2232000,"endMs",4342000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5329265-87b9768d59923de098217aef19bb59cd&start=2232&end=4342","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5329265-87b9768d59923de098217aef19bb59cd/thumbnail_2232000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6178038/Arkansas/Council-declines-to-review-Aptus-Financial-student-loan-assistance-contract-after-hours-of-debate","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6178038-bf0b6d1a8da6d95d0c59bcdfc10ab03a/orig.mp4?Expires=1771178946&Signature=j51AD0sw4uz9ADMcl7lPdMZdpoE8YkPFHHmWn8k7jn~DbgrKc7dhs5LKxmwpvRgO83aYp7ebC~57hIga0YUGdYR7l7KhBJaHnT~u3byLne8Tu6LY8HUeE6mn0S3beWF1UT3LWUPE7kQfEUNVuwzSHyJN5G6Uhmy~2Sa4-ffHK7Zq15CWgCK3kVZmZOD7L5~PbGtJ6i7ubG2mOPsUGLzGh~AW6EPf~lmjXhVYNfzBm9OXiPS0bYs7pf3HEHQ9fsiWWVoPDaDHoqEzdlT-haVbPnZFpbg06Mrez2n~hj-EjxtCAl4OFRPsnr8M1ASiUMPdC1h09IiWhfMCUTk6CuF4ag__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Arkansas State Legislature","date","2025-06-20T00:00:00Z","article","The Arkansas Legislative Council declined to review a contract with Aptus Financial to provide student-loan navigation services for state employees after extended debate and a roll-call review motion failed on June 19.

Why it matters: The contract was presented to the personnel subcommittee and recommended for review; it would have allowed employees access to consultants who help navigate the federal Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) and related repayment options. Proponents, including members of the House and Senate, said the service is low-cost to the state employee benefits cash fund and helps recruit and retain public employees. Opponents said the state had recently approved a $140 million pay increase for employees and questioned using employer-paid funds for third-party consultants.

Representative Roseanne Warren, reporting the personnel subcommittee’s work, said the committee reviewed a contract between the Employee Benefits Division and Aptus Financial that would provide services to state employees to help navigate the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program. Representative Pilkington, who said she had paid for a private consultant herself, urged approval and described the program’s complexity: “I spent $500 of my own money to hire a consultant to do this.”

Representative Kavanaugh and others argued against using state-provided funds and said employees could use payroll deduction if they wanted consultant services. Senator Davis and others countered that the contract would be paid from a state-employee cash fund, not from general-tax receipts; Davis said, “We are not using tax dollars for this contract. This contract is being paid out of a cash fund that state employees pay into. It is not tax dollars.” The Employee Benefits Division staff told the committee their estimate of eligible employees varied; different members cited figures ranging from about 3,000 eligible to approximately 7,200 or roughly 30% of the state workforce depending on definitions.

A motion to have the council review the Aptus contract and to split the chambers for a roll-call vote passed the threshold to force a roll-call; after debate the roll call on whether to review the contract failed and the item was not reviewed. An agency representative noted the agency could bring the contract back to the council at a later date.

Outcome: The council did not approve review of the Aptus Financial contract at the June 19 meeting. Several members said they hoped the agency would return the contract for future consideration.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle"," ARKANSAS LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL (ALC) Jun 20, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","After extended debate, the Arkansas Legislative Council voted not to review a proposed contract with Aptus Financial (Aptus) for services to help state employees navigate federal Public Service Loan Forgiveness processes; proponents said the service was low-cost to the employee-benefits cash fund, opponents cited fiscal priorities.","taxTitle","2025 Legislative Meetings, Arkansas","taxId",78622,"location","Arkansas","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6178043,"ALC debate over $90 million for education assistance ends with full peer report approved; separate vote on $90M fails",391,1319000,1710000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5329265-87b9768d59923de098217aef19bb59cd&start=1319&end=1710","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5329265-87b9768d59923de098217aef19bb59cd/thumbnail_1319000.jpg","/articles/6178043/Arkansas/ALC-debate-over-90-million-for-education-assistance-ends-with-full-peer-report-approved-separate-vote-on-90M-fails","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6178043-d0b31c865b3429e421be9e1b53e77a09/orig.mp4?Expires=1771178946&Signature=fZ4qLznc7as9LpGNVc9asMfQuV0meJAx7cMMHeJOkXI6R-0hCE-kYoBO4~BVlBVAFH2XunhXesaqDs~2XinRURj0Wd6C15f8XXRz32y~uN74yX1BbgL-VN3AMjF5uvF9Uw1e4XwmtNf-oBFXDoUfscTe5s-LduuqFiBtgFa3M5I7DaUuMIR9z0-Q47IGtUK5nVZ3AWeFAqNJ4sJXJWKP5Wcxijm6Wu~8Ot9mxM53RP13Doi58220h8ciBcMEr-jW8ssy3q6pxOsIZ8bxBrNUpH8sqm9pXLyGin7aWuNhWPUPbQ1EMm1InNqXH~zaQFiTYCY4GlEsb5C55yJ3LfOuLg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Members of the Arkansas Legislative Council debated whether to separate a $90,000,000 restrictive-reserve transfer tied to EFA funding before approving the broader peer-review subcommittee report on June 19. Representative Collins moved “that we take out this $90,000,000 for a separate vote and approve the rest.” The substitute motion failed; the council then approved the peer-review report as presented.

Why it matters: Committee testimony and members’ questions showed the transfer affects thousands of students. Department of Education staff said cumulative budget actions have placed roughly $177,000,000 for the program in the RSA and that the legislature had added a one-time $90,000,000 appropriation during the session; department officials said they were still evaluating whether current funds would cover all applicants for the 2025–26 school year.

Department estimates cited in the meeting indicated that, if the $90 million were not approved for the coming year, roughly 12,800 students would be left without funding for the school year in which they applied. Department officials also distinguished between applications received and approved: one staff member said total applications received were about 44,000; the department stated that the breakdown of applications received included roughly 28,000 private-school applications and about 16,000 home-school applications, and that review and admissions were ongoing.

A substitute motion led by Representative Collins to remove the $90,000,000 from the package for a separate vote was seconded but failed on a voice vote. After the substitute failed, Representative Wardlaw moved to approve the peer-review report; that motion passed on a voice vote.

Members asked whether the funds already in agency budgets or other one-time appropriations would be sufficient; Education staff said they were still evaluating applications and anticipated setting a final cutoff for the current school year around mid-August. Staff emphasized a priority window existed but that applications continued to be accepted after that window closed.

The council approved the peer-review subcommittee report, which included authorizations for several temporary appropriations such as American Rescue Plan Act and Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act funds, restricted reserve transfers and related items detailed in the packet.","Legislators debated a $90 million restrictive-reserve transfer intended for EFA-related funding; a substitute motion to separate the $90 million for a separate vote failed, and the peer-review subcommittee’s report was approved, leaving the $90 million included in the package.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6178048,"Arkansas May revenue collections fall below year-ago levels; officials say surplus likely",314,695000,1009000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5329265-87b9768d59923de098217aef19bb59cd&start=695&end=1009","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5329265-87b9768d59923de098217aef19bb59cd/thumbnail_695000.jpg","/articles/6178048/Arkansas/Arkansas-May-revenue-collections-fall-below-year-ago-levels-officials-say-surplus-likely","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6178048-73ddc7b97bea5e8de543f512e94e65e8/orig.mp4?Expires=1771178946&Signature=fOOX1GT-ibX-rhQrG-Qg0hCbKZKJPpLivun6WXd541HFtfTxAO5RZQIvAnSG5ffpID~7EMwJJUDLnNpG3-a3HT465b2giQ3ogqdsbHBj9Jp8VHuyskx-3lCCibO2s67f6Kp547Qh-nhQ15UoCAdoc5zyh-iOPD-J5j2iDUrZ45WgwmmjIkSbn1ml581zjoO1SHDLLOanR9QWA78WKr~0NhqiQtyTjK0EC08agNxHbIOGapmwLIKv8uk4yWRMvehGZKhuwaS5Gy94-0LLe~qsW-caxtdN3PTIiWJ-jPQLSVzTzKI6-UhDsmKfEpoNILl9wI9sxoHTvOJtCTZ-JbNXrA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Carlos Silva, senior economist at the Bureau of Legislative Research, told the Arkansas Legislative Council on June 19 that gross general revenue collections through May totaled about $7,400,000,000, roughly $372,700,000 (4.8%) below the same point a year earlier. Silva said net general revenues available for distribution were about $5,900,000,000, roughly $244,000,000 (4%) below last year’s level.

The revenue picture has improved relative to the most recent forecast, Silva said, and there are “a lot of important days coming in for collections in the end of the month.” He told members the agency’s preliminary numbers suggested the state could meet its Revenue Stabilization Act benchmark in the coming days.

Why it matters: The state’s fund balance and budget choices for the coming year hinge on final June collections. Lawmakers and staff said a surplus would affect decisions about transfers and one-time appropriations heading into the next fiscal year.

During questions, Representative Meeks asked whether the state was likely to finish the fiscal year with a surplus. Silva said the amount of surplus would depend on collections over the next several days and that the state could be “pretty close to the revenue forecast” if collections continue as they had to that point.

Jim Hudson, secretary of the Department of Finance and Administration, corrected an earlier statement about a tax-deadline change and clarified the filing extension: “It was extended to July 31, not September 15.” He said the department’s revised forecast already accounted for that extension and that the forecast projected a surplus of about $215,000,000; current collections were roughly $17 million above the forecast, Hudson said.

Hudson added that because the revised forecast already assumed the filing-extension effects, the department was monitoring how much estimated-tax payments and other receipts would shift from late June into July — a shift that would move some revenue into the next fiscal year.

Silva also detailed the monthly and special-revenue breakdowns in the packet and offered to answer further questions; members had none. The council received the report and moved on to committee business.

Looking ahead: Officials said final June collections and a handful of large remittance days would determine the final surplus amount and whether any additional transfers or one-time appropriations were advisable before the next regular session.","State officials reported May gross general revenues of about $7.4 billion, roughly $372.7 million (4.8%) below the same point last year; revised forecasts and upcoming large collection days make a small surplus likely, state finance officials said.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Council declines to review Aptus Financial student-loan assistance contract after hours of debate

ALC debate over $90 million for education assistance ends with full peer report approved; separate vote on $90M fails

Arkansas May revenue collections fall below year-ago levels; officials say surplus likely